Outcome Document for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)

from the

UNEP Major Groups and Stakeholders

Advisory Group on International Environmental Governance

31 October 2011

The UNEP Major Groups and Stakeholders Advisory Group on International Environmental
Governance (http://www.agieg.net) consists of 9 experts and their alternates named by the
Major Groups and 6 experts and their alternates from the regions, working in their personal
capacities. It was created by the UNEP Major Groups Facilitating Committee with UNEP
support to be a body through which input from major groups and stakeholders could be
channelled into the International Environmental Governance (IEG) processes leading to
Rio+20. It prepared an information document for the UNEP Governing Council
(UNEP/GC.26/INF/19*, January 2011), and now offers these proposals for the draft
outcome document for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development. These proposals
are a compilation of submissions from a range of major group and regional perspectives,
and do not represent a consensus of all members of the Advisory Group. Rather they
reflect the diversity and sometimes contradictory nature of the perspectives of major
groups and stakeholders. Contributors to this paper who support its submission include
Neth Dano (NGO - Action Group on Erosion Technology and Conservation ETC), Sascha
Gabizon (Women - Women in Europe for a Common Future WECF), Laura Martin Murillo
(Trade Unions and Workers - SustainLabour), Sébastien Duyck (Youth - Service Civil
International), Satishkumar Belliethathan (Farmers - Horn of Africa Regional Environment
Centre), Lucy Mulenkei (Indigenous People and their communities - Indigenous
Information Network), Maria Ivanova (Local Authorities - Environmental Governance
Project), Mehdi Ahmed Jaaffar (West Asia - Environment Society of Oman EDO), Robert
Bakiika (Africa - Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement Bwaise Facility),
John McDonald (North America - Institute For Multi-Track Diplomacy) and Philip Vergragt
(North America - Tellus Institute) and Arthur Dahl (Europe - International Environment
Forum). The Business & Industry Major Group (Thomas Jacob) contributed to the drafting
but disassociated itself from the final document.

Objective of the Conference

RENEWED POLITICAL COMMITMENT

There is a huge tension between the nation-state and the forces of globalization, with the
nation-state as the dominant organizing institution of governance and decision-making,
while being limited by its own sovereign bounds from impacting directly on global forces.
Efforts at global regulation must necessarily reflect compromise among the varying
sovereign interests, and therefore often fall short of what any given state or interest would
wish. One result is that the UN has failed to meet Agenda 21s objectives for environment
and sustainability, demonstrating that governance by State action, and a private sector
regulated only at the national level and dominated by financial and trade institutions, are
inadequate in a world of global markets and environmental problems. To deliver more
consistently and globally against those objectives requires a more inclusive approach to
governance that more effectively harnesses the variety of actors and rights holders.
Renewed political commitment to multilateral action by governments is essential, but must
be supported by measures to build trust among governments that their engagements will
be respected. Peer review and accountability mechanisms should be complemented by a
clear role for civil society and rights holders, including all the major groups.

To address the integration of issues across sectors, the existing structure of nation states
and intergovernmental organizations needs serious rethinking and restructuring, with new
cross-linkages reflecting interconnected problems, and bottom-up as well as top-down
modes of functioning. Single-issue approaches are no longer effective when all problems
are reflections of complex systems interactions. States and intergovernmental
organizations should open up to wider partnerships and collaborations with all non-state
actors, especially rights holders and civil society in all its diversity, to enable practical
solutions to emerge. Only through such collaborations will it be possible to mobilize greater
resources, reach the public more widely and deeply with information and educational
programmes, build capacity and empowerment at multiple levels, and observe, analyze
and report on the complex interlinked processes of natural and human systems as a basis
for collective reflection on the further actions required. Each Rio+20 decision, partnership
and initiative needs to incorporate explicitly the economic, social and environmental
dimensions of sustainable development.

Green Economy in the context of Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication

GOVERNANCE FOR INNOVATION IN A GREEN ECONOMY

Basis for Action

Achieving sustainability through a green economy implies both top-down and bottom-up
governance processes. Institutional innovation needs to begin with the basics and
systematically build up a sequence of actions to create confidence in the new institutions.
Governance reform has to be fundamental as it needs to change core structural elements,
but reform has to be incremental as only sequential steps can lead to systematic change.
Systematic and well thought-out incremental reform at multiple points and levels in the
overall system can do much to advance effective, fundamental reform. Global businesses
need consistency in sustainable practices and standards to function in global markets,
which should be encouraged by intergovernmental institutions. Governance for a green
economy is also relevant at the local level, where green economic activities should be
characterized by ecologically sound, socially equitable, transparent and democratic
business and consumption practices. Contributing to these are not only the evolving
practices within business and industry, but also local policies, multi-stakeholder grassroots
experiments, local entrepreneurs and social enterprises. Such experiments and practices
should be endorsed by national and state policies, as well as through international
frameworks and mechanisms. Public policies should contribute to voluntary business
sustainability and responsibility, stimulating and rewarding innovation in this direction.

Objectives

To create governance mechanisms that provide an enabling framework for a green and
equitable economy, thus stimulating and rewarding business and community innovation
and local experimentation.

Activities/Proposals

1. Governments should provide a clear framework of incentives and regulations to
encourage more sustainable economic activity, while removing distorting and
unsustainable Subsidies as determined by the World Trade Organization.

2. Adopt the 10-year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and
Production as negotiated to closure during CSD-19, supported by a global research
programme to develop means of implementation.

3. Intergovernmental organizations should deliver norms, models and guidance and
catalyze workable and predictable state-level regulatory governance with reasonable
international consistency, to facilitate and reward evolution of economic activities in
private, public and social enterprises toward a more level global framework for
sustainability.

4. Establish a global centre or policy bank of expertise and technical assistance to help
governments adopt public policies to stimulate non-statutory above-compliance standards
of social and environmental performance, so that governments can adopt more such
policies and learn from them.

GOVERNANCE FOR A SOCIAL DIMENSION IN A GREEN ECONOMY

Basis for Action

To address concerns that the green economy might ignore the social dimension of
sustainability, governance mechanisms for the green economy should insure that it
includes not only green technologies, infrastructure, investments and jobs, but also a more
equitable and nurturing rights-based and inclusive society with chances for everyone to
earn a living wage in decent working conditions, partake freely in democratic political
activities, and increase their own well-being, as well as the well-being of their communities
and of the entire planet. The participation of young people, women, poor and low-skilled
workers is important.

The operative economic models have demonstrated fundamental flaws in repeated
financial and economic crises, vulnerability to speculation, and excessive debt. In many
traditional cultures there was no concept of private property, but alternatives based on
shared rights and responsibilities, community decision-making and reciprocity. As part of
institutional arrangements, an international process is needed to explore alternative value
systems and indigenous economic models and ask what they may have to offer to a more
equitable and sustainable global to local economy that goes beyond the present economic
paradigm. Global financial governance needs restructuring based on principles of equity,
transparency, accountability and democracy.

Objectives

To ensure that governance for economic reform addresses social issues founded on
principles of justice, equity, transparency and accountability.

Activities/Proposals

1. Launch an international consultation on alternative economic models, cross-cultural and
indigenous perspectives, including a review of the underlying purposes of the economy
and the values by which it operates.

2. Accelerate the consideration of the necessary international regulation of the financial
system to control excessive speculation, ensure just taxation including socially-progressive
and environmentally friendly tax reforms, and provide a stable framework for international
banking, investment and commerce.

3. Create institutional rules to support the expansion of mutual credit systems and
complementary currencies at the community level.

Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development

ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY

Basis for Action

While States through the United Nations have made a major effort to define moral
standards and ethical principles in the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, and many other instruments and declarations, these too often remain abstract
ideals when faced with political expediency. Moral and ethical paradigms remain
challenged in providing sufficient direction for society in times of rapid change and growing
inequities, resulting in increasing difficulties with law enforcement, security and
governance. Globally, there is a generalized lack of accountability, posing a challenge in
building consensus on governance mechanisms. Civil society can play an important
supporting role to governance in this area by contributing to an ethical framework for
decision-making and drawing attention to the ethical implications of policy proposals. The
UN needs mechanisms to express the fundamental interests of all humanity, assisting its
member states to see that global sustainability is in their national interest, and raising the
level of debate. Decisions that are justified by reference to ethical principles like justice
and equity will also have a better chance of receiving the adherence of the peoples of the
world in their implementation. In the context of Rio+20, there is a risk that the issue of
green economy merely displaces the main questions, failing to acknowledge problems of
poor governance, corruption and human and environmental exploitation, rather than going
back to core human values of respect for biodiversity, a moral obligation to ensure inter-
generational sustainability, and a faith, belief, or rights-based reverence for the relationship
between nature, local territories, and the individuals own sense of identity and culture.

Objectives

To keep ethical principles at the heart of UN governance, and to ensure that decision-
makers have available the relevant principles and ethical implications when taking
decisions and approving proposals and programmes.

Activities/Proposals

1. Establish a UN Permanent Forum on Ethics, patterned after the Permanent Forum of
Indigenous Peoples, to provide a space for systematic consultation on the ethical
implications of issues, proposals and projects before the Security Council, the General
Assembly, and other UN organs. Membership would be open to faith-based, spiritual and
other organizations of civil society with an ethical focus, that accept the principles of the
UN Charter and other instruments, including freedom of conscience for all peoples, and
that renounce prejudice, bigotry and violence. Their involvement in UN processes would
implicate them more directly in finding constructive solutions.

2. Create a UN Office of Ethical Assessment in the Secretariat, similar in function to the
Offices of Technology Assessment that have operated effectively at the national level, to
be staffed by experts knowledgeable in the major religious and ethical perspectives, and to
draw on outside consultants as necessary. The office would assemble and codify all the
ethical principles adopted by intergovernmental processes as the framework for its work. It
would prepare reports on the ethical implications of policy-relevant issues at the request of
the organs of the UN system, the secretariat, and member governments. It could also
provide ethical input to scientific advisory processes. It must be able to operate with
complete independence from any political pressure or interference in its work.

THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY

Basis for Action

The rise of civil society is among the most significant developments of institutional
evolution since UNCED. Civil society has developed its engagement on all fronts and at
different levels, providing leading forums, pioneering in implementing, advocating for a
shift in paradigms, and actively pushing to introduce reforms globally and regionally. Civil
society organizations are effective in program design, implementation and monitoring.
They have proven experience and success in fundraising for diverse projects, and possess
strong advocacy skills. Most manage well and harness local expertise and skills.
Indigenous peoples in particular are holders of valuable traditional ecological knowledge
which can make an important contribution to sustainable environmental, social and
economic policy making. On the monitoring side, civil society organizations have
effectively played a watchdog role, worked with and pressured governments, and
advocated for more progressive agendas. Civil society reaches from the local to the global
level, and is able to leverage linkages and information, and to mobilize ideas and
resources across sovereign boundaries. Indeed, it is this adaptation of civil society to
leverage the forces of globalization that represents the major opportunity for advancing
sustainability globally. The Major Groups defined in Agenda 21, ranging from business and
industry to labour to indigenous peoples, have provided a working mechanism for inputs to
the Commission on Sustainable Development and other UN processes. It is time to
acknowledge their constructive role, and to increase civil society participation in UN
processes with greater responsibility and direct engagement in discussion forums.
Institutional arrangements for sustainability should capitalize on the unique global
capabilities of all the major groups and civil society. The reformed Committee on World
Food Security (CFS) under the auspices of the Rome-based UN agencies provides an
existing innovative model for civil society participation in decision-making, as do the
various industry-specific initiatives to advance sustainability practices throughout entire
value-chains within global markets. The UNEP Major Groups and Stakeholders Advisory
Group on International Environmental Governance is an example of civil society expert
input to intergovernmental processes.

Objectives

Civil society, including the spectrum of interests represented as UN Major Groups, should
be enabled and supported to provide input in its various forms: data collection and
analysis, improving management and decision-making processes, reflecting on the role of
the various actors, and agenda-setting and policy development. It should advocate for
environmental justice, provide expertise and analysis, intellectually challenge government
counterparts, mobilize public opinion, and legitimize decision-making mechanisms.

Activities/Proposals

1. Allow substantive involvement of civil society in discussion and policy-making
processes, including granting major group representatives full access and active
participation (not only observer status) in international/regional/national conferences and
forums, and establishing processes to engage them in negotiations.

2. Develop inclusive and transparent guidelines/standards for civil society engagement in
these forums and processes across the UN system and intergovernmental institutions,
including special sessions for presentations by civil society.

3. Set up expert advisory groups from civil society at the highest level of UN bodies to
participate in policy development.

4. Recognize the major role of civil society in scientific advisory processes, giving weight to
scientific expertise (including the social sciences) as well as indigenous and local
knowledge with relevance to sustainability.

5. Include civil society representatives regularly in national delegations to
intergovernmental deliberations.

6. Implement the principles of transparency and access to information, meaningful
opportunities for public participation, especially by parties at interest, and accountability as
fundamental elements of institutional arrangements for sustainability, and provide access
for civil society parties at interest to effective legal remedies, mediation and dispute
settlement mechanisms at the international level, such as a complaint procedure (like at
the Human Rights Council) and a dispute resolution mechanism (like at the World Trade
Organization).

7. Support knowledge generation and sharing among key players, civil society and social
movements within and across countries.

8. Empower indigenous peoples as stewards of nature, particularly ensuring land rights
and using the international system and instruments to constrain behaviour by nation-states
and the private sector that is undermining indigenous governance, value systems and
sustainability.

9. Create a viable and stable financial mechanism to assist and support the participation in
international governance of civil society organizations from the global south and of those
constituencies that are most directly affected and might not have the means to participate
without encouragement and support.

10. Link the institutional arrangements for sustainability to the educational processes,
media and institutions of civil society that play an important role both in building the human
and institutional capacity to implement sustainability and in preparing public opinion to
support the necessary actions to ensure equity and protect environmental systems and
resources.

LOCAL AND SUB-NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS

Basis for Action

Local authorities were included as a Major Group of civil society in Agenda 21, but they are
governments and have a legitimacy similar to national governments. Since sustainability
requires multilevel governance at the local through global levels, the institutional
arrangements for sustainability should include a place at the table for all levels of
government and not just nation-states. Many cities today have populations and economies
larger than most nation-states, and local governments are critical to implementing
sustainability. Sub-national governments (regions, provinces, states, cantons, etc.) also
have important responsibilities and are closer to their citizens.

Objectives

To base institutional arrangements for sustainability on a multilevel concept of governance.

Activities/Proposals

1. Acknowledge that local and sub-national (regional) governments have a democratic
legitimacy comparable to national governments and an important role in implementing
sustainability. Institutional arrangements for sustainability should include representation of
multiple levels of governance including local, sub-national, national, regional and ultimately
global levels.

2. Provide concrete mechanisms in local and sub-national governments for civil society
and rights holders to participate actively in the development, implementation and
monitoring of sustainable development strategies.

ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY

Basis for Action

UNEP was created in 1972 to catalyze the integration of environment into all parts of the
UN system. In this it largely succeeded. Today there is a need to integrate sustainability
into all parts of the UN system so that they all see sustainable development as part of their
fundamental mandate. This will only happen if there is an entity with this catalytic
responsibility across the economic, social and environmental dimensions. UNEP success
was due in part to the use of the Environment Fund to support other agencies in
implementing environmental activities within their areas of responsibility. A similar financial
mechanism would facilitate the transition to sustainability today. UNEP would continue to
be the environmental voice in the UN system. Also, a new more inclusive approach to
national sustainable development strategies is needed, since few countries complied with
the recommendations in Agenda 21, and implementation was poor.

Objectives

To create an entity or process in the UN responsible to advance the pace and coordinate
the integration of sustainability into all activities under UN auspices, with a funding
mechanism to support this action.

Activities/Proposals

1. Establish an office, programme or council at a high enough level in the UN structure to
influence all parts of the UN system, charged with integrating sustainability into all UN
activities through expert advice, review and evaluation, and policy-making.

2. Create a Sustainable Investment Fund supported by innovative financial mechanisms,
to provide investment capital for environmentally-responsible and equitable projects of
international organizations, regional and national governments and the private sector.

3. Encourage the adoption of global, regional, national and local Sustainability Strategies
constructed with input from multistakeholder dialogues, including a comprehensive
sustainability and equity vision, and a strategy and pathways how to get there. The
strategy could include an analysis of local strengths and weaknesses, external threats and
opportunities, as well as local assets. Such a mechanism would foster trust among
stakeholders, create a long term perspective, and inspire a positive outlook towards
change.

4. Increase the efficiency of multilateral governance by synchronizing and streamlining the
number of intergovernmental meetings needed to oversee treaties and agreements, and
rationalizing treaty secretariats to improve coherence and optimize financial management.

5. Secure collective commitment for the establishment, at the national level, of offices for
Ombudspersons for Future Generations. These independent institutions would be
mandated to take part to the assessment of long-term impacts of policies, to seize the
justice system in case of projects undermining the position and resources of future
generations, and to respond to citizen petitions.

6. Establish an independent office for a High Commissioner for Future Generations within
the UN system with both an advisory role with respect to long terms impacts of UN policies
and decisions, and a mechanism to respond to citizens' petitions on transboundary and
international environmental issues. The office could be assisted by an Intergenerational
Assembly to facilitate a global foresight process. It could also enable the establishment of
Ombudspersons for Future Generations at the national level, including supporting the
capacity of developing countries to implement this proposal and providing a forum for the
exchange of best practices.

INTERNATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Basis for Action

Institutional arrangements must ensure fair multilateral negotiations, taking into account
financial, economic and power asymmetries, moving toward a more coherent principle-
and rule-based institutional structure with universal participation. Developing countries
priorities meaning an integrated approach to poverty eradication, development and
environment should figure more prominently and be embedded within sustainability
policies, supported by more effective governance. A set of clear and enforceable rules
would also ensure that fairness and equity in terms of benefit and burden sharing, guided
by the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, are built in and that decision
making is based on democratic principles. The obligations of industrialized countries to
advance more sustainable production and consumption patterns should also be
negotiated, decided and complied with.

Resource consumption, biodiversity loss and climate change are aggravating poverty and
instability and reducing options and opportunities for developing countries in the future.
The vulnerable, poor, and disempowered peoples cannot rely on market mechanisms,
because they cannot invest or discount the future. They need rights to protect their lives
and livelihoods. In the present global market economy, the poor will lose out to the rich in
the distribution of increasingly scarce resources. Mechanisms for international
management of trade in resources for the collective benefit of all peoples and the planet
will be the best means to protect the interests of the weak against exploitation by the
powerful, and ultimately to ensure the equitable distribution of resources in the common
interest. Such management must aim both to reserve adequate resources for poverty
reduction and to ensure sustainability for future generations.

Institutions and actions at the regional level can respond more effectively to the
specificities and needs of developing countries within their regions. Some regions have
organized effectively, as with the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment
Programme (SPREP) and some of the Regional Seas Programmes. Africa has struggled
to go beyond policy prescriptions to actions by governments for implementation.

Activities/Proposals

1. Ensure that the rules of procedure for intergovernmental processes in the institutional
arrangements for sustainability protect the rights and clarify the responsibilities of all
nations as an expression of global solidarity, while ensuring that planetary requirements for
sustainability take precedence over limited national interests.

2. Strengthen the capacity of countries of the South to implement effective sustainability
policies, in particular with regards to the rule of law, through technical assistance and
advocacy of justice and rights, and ensure integration of environmental considerations
therein.

3. Integrate global environmental objectives in national sustainable development and
poverty eradication strategies, with assistance from the UN to developing countries to
move effectively towards a sustainable development path that integrates economic
progress, social progress and equity, and environmental protection.

4. Launch a process to consider the implications of essential resource (including food and
energy) shortages and price volatility on the poor, and to explore mechanisms to ensure
access to the requirements for life regardless of ability to pay, while stimulating local
subsistence activities and job creation.

5. Provide a supportive international framework for regional programmes, conventions and
intergovernmental organizations, and ensure that they have a place alongside nation-
states in the institutional arrangements for sustainability.

SCIENCE AND DECISION-MAKING

Basis for Action

The deep gap between scientific rationality and political expediency is often perceived to
be great. Yet the best available scientific understanding of the planet and its environmental
and socio-political processes is an essential foundation for decision-making at all levels of
governance. The scientific questions need to be developed in cooperation with developing
countries, and with as much input and involvement as possible of their scientists, including
social scientists and holders of traditional knowledge. A responsive scientific assessment
component in institutional arrangements for sustainability will help improve the capacity of
developing countries to understand, manage, conserve and sustainably utilize their human
resources and environmental systems, especially their natural ecosystems, the impacts of
climate change, and the poverty/environment nexus. Committed North-South cooperation
in a global research network and scientific assessment can both compensate for the often-
weak scientific infrastructure in developing countries by providing collective access to
scientific information, and assist in reducing the knowledge gap by building capacity for
environmental assessment and reporting in all regions. It should facilitate access of
developing countries to appropriate scientific knowledge, technologies and policy
responses that respond to their specific needs and situations, and be supported by stable
financial and technical components.

Objectives

To ensure that action for sustainability is supported by the best scientific advice available,
at all levels of governance.

Activities/Proposals

1. Establish a UN Office of Technology Assessment advisory to the UN General Assembly,
with independent status and funding, to conduct research, investigate trends and make
future studies, to trace present and future consequences of technological innovations like
geoengineering, biotechnology, new materials, information and communication technology,
etc., and to translate these studies into policy recommendations.

2. In all international scientific assessments, implement transparent selection processes
for the best natural and social scientists, ethicists, and holders of environmental and
human dimensions knowledge, with disclosure of any affiliations, and apply procedures to
arrive at the best consensus or peer-reviewed scientific information.

3. Create a UN mechanism similar to the UN Statistical Commission to establish criteria for
all international scientific review and assessment processes, to verify their methodologies,
and to build national capacity to participate in such assessments.

4. Ensure that scientific assessments build to a fully integrated assessment of planetary
sustainability, including systematic reporting on the main environmental and human
dimensions challenges and constraints, incorporating existing assessments but also
considering the interactions among all environmental systems and human impacts.

GOVERNANCE BEYOND NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

Basis for Action

Areas beyond national sovereignty, including the high seas and the atmosphere, are
subject to some of the most extreme forms of unsustainable use, including overfishing and
atmospheric pollution. Global trade and wide-ranging fishing fleets have rendered regional
fishing agreements inadequate. Discussions of individual moratoria on technologies posing
grave threats to the planet and the people (such as geoengineering), without sufficient
technology assessment or global agreement on their implementation, demonstrate the
need for an institutional framework for assessment and governance of these areas. The
development of mechanisms for collective international responsibility and governance of
the global commons, with due respect to the precautionary principle, would not infringe on
national sovereignty and could begin to build confidence in operational management of
resources by global institutions in the common interest.

Objectives

To establish an international mechanism for governance of global commons issues not
already subject to global processes, to complement the present governance by nation-
states and to fill the gaps in existing international arrangements.

Activities/Proposals

1. Building on the Law of the Sea, establish a coherent global mechanism for the
regulation of ocean fisheries mandated to reduce fishing pressure to the capacity of the
resource, and ultimately to restoring the productivity of the seas. The mechanism should
include provisions for high seas marine protected areas, and for environmental impact
assessment and regulation of activities such as seabed mineral extraction beyond national
jurisdictions.

2. Build on the moratoria on geoengineering, ocean fertilization and Terminator technology
agreed at the CBD by establishing an objective international procedure for technology
assessment for proposals with potential planetary impact, coupled with a mechanism
within the UN for collective approval of the testing and implementation of such
technologies, and a requirement for international insurance of the risks of adverse
consequences. The mechanism could be an Office of Technology Assessment advisory to
the General Assembly, or a rejuvenated UN Centre on Science and Technology for
Development.

3. Seek the opinion of the International Court of Justice on whether manipulating the
environment through geoengineering could be in violation of the Environmental
Modification Treaty of 1978, or whether a new legal framework is required.

4. Complement the scientific and technological assessment of new technologies with
social and economic assessments of winners and losers from the application of such
technologies, and wide public consultation with affected groups and civil society.